Welcome to the new eGriz Forum!The eGriz.com forums have been upgraded to the latest version (it took longer than expected). You may notice differences here and there, mobile friendly being one of them. If the site is looking funky to you, please clear your temporary internet files. You can click the X in the top right corner of this message to remove it. Enjoy!

Can the judge in this trial dictate the use of a supermajority or is that just in civil trials?

Also, if there is just one Gwen on the jury which results in a hung jury it appears that there is no time limit on how long the prosecution has to re-charge. It could be years that they leave this hanging. Wouldn't this end any chance of JJ ever playing for UM again?

while i didn't want to partake in the williams-thug thread because frankly it's embarrasing...i do have a question in regards to the jj trial...

it's my understanding that jury duty selection starts tomorrow? how in the hell can you find a jury in a small community like missoula and expect there to be no bias? seems this will a pretty high profile case considering the accused and the community. what steps are in place to make sure this guy and his accuser get a fair trial?

ilovethecats wrote:while i didn't want to partake in the williams-thug thread because frankly it's embarrasing...i do have a question in regards to the jj trial...

it's my understanding that jury duty selection starts tomorrow? how in the hell can you find a jury in a small community like missoula and expect there to be no bias? seems this will a pretty high profile case considering the accused and the community. what steps are in place to make sure this guy and his accuser get a fair trial?

In my experience as juror the judge simply asked prospective jurors if they have heard or read about the case and whether they have heard or seen anything that would not allow them to render an impartial decision. As long as you could say that you could be impartial, you were ok for the jury.

ilovethecats wrote:while i didn't want to partake in the williams-thug thread because frankly it's embarrasing...i do have a question in regards to the jj trial...

it's my understanding that jury duty selection starts tomorrow? how in the hell can you find a jury in a small community like missoula and expect there to be no bias? seems this will a pretty high profile case considering the accused and the community. what steps are in place to make sure this guy and his accuser get a fair trial?

In my experience as juror the judge simply asked prospective jurors if they have heard or read about the case and whether they have heard or seen anything that would not allow them to render an impartial decision. As long as you could say that you could be impartial, you were ok for the jury.

thanks. that's more of what i was looking for. i am very aware that some people in missoula don't care about football. i wasn't implying that. i just thought that when selecting a jury if anyone had heard of the acused, the accuser, or the allegations then they couldn't be on the jury. just thought that if this was indeed true of what is asked of jurors...if that was even possible in a small community like missoula.

in other words, you don't have to be a fan of the griz. but you have to live under a rock if you haven't heard anything about jordan johnson or the accusations.

I doubt there are many in town who haven't heard of it. Even people who don't follow the Griz athletics have heard of it, and talk about it. The town is also full of activists on both sides. Those that side with the victim, and those that side with the athlete. Not all of those tell the truth when asked, which could make it very tough to pick an impartial jury.

I read this morning that over 200 of the 400 potential jurors had already been dismissed, so there must have been some sort of questionnaire filled out that is causing that. Hard to believe the judge would let that many out for work and other issues.

I was on a jury panel quite a while ago for a murder case. Something like 250 jurors. I was way down at the bottom of the list, and did not get selected, but the judge wouldn't let anyone out for work, etc. Just told the jurors to bring in their employers and have them explain to the judge why the employee couldn't get out of work. Interestingly, no employers showed up...

NorthEndZoneDan wrote:Bear Axed... you got an invite! Tell us what you saw. C'mon man

can't yet, I'm still in

Oh my god. If you were to get selected, somewhere on bcn there would be about 619 heads which would simultaneously explode!

. Dude, no. Again, you'll have to show me where these people who want Jordy convicted are. Not people who don't want him to play against them again, because that's quite a different thing. I would love never to see Jordy play against the Cats, but not because he is in prison. It's a testament to how good he is and how he obliterated us in 2011. It's called respect, and I think an Cat fan I know has it for him on the football field.

But this is what the trial is for, isn't it? To let those arguments about Jordy's good nature stand scrutiny against his lesser qualities. The jury will decide, and if BearAssed is paying attention as much to that trial as he is to what happens in Bozeman, then I'm sure Jordy will get a fair result.